On Mon, 5 Sep 2011 10:15:28 +0200 Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> wrote:
> The rps disabling code wasn't properly cancelling outstanding work > items. Also add a comment that explains why we're not racing with > the work item that could unmask interrupts - that piece of code > confused me quite a bit. > > v2: Ben Widawsky pointed out that the first patch would deadlock > (and a few lesser problems). All corrected. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Ben Widawsky <[email protected]> This looks good. I think we need to do something in i915_save_state() too though. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
